Search results

This paper investigates the roles and activities of the orchestrators of innovation networks constituted within cities. In this sense, the authors expected to contribute for research related to the roles and activities of the orchestrators of innovation networks constituted in the scope of cities given the large number and diversity of complex and multiple dimensions social actors (Castells & Borja, 1996; Reypens, Lievens & Blazevic, 2019).

The authors conducted an exploratory research with a single case study in depth. The case chosen for the paper is the case of Pacto Alegre. The case selection criterion was the relevance of the Pacto Alegre Case in the construction of an innovation network in the city of Porto Alegre, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil. The Pacto Alegre network was proposed by the Alliance for Innovation (composed of the three main Universities in the city: UFRGS, PUCRS and UNISINOS) and by the Municipality of Porto Alegre. In addition to these actors, the network counts on financial and development institutions as sponsors, with media partners, with design partners, with an advisory board (composed of five professionals considered references in different themes) and composed by more than 100 companies, associations and institutions from different areas (Pacto Alegre, 2019). Data were collected from 09/20/2020 to 11/30/2020 through in-depth interviews, documentary research and non-participant observation.

In this research, the authors highlighted the city as a community that involves and integrates various actors, such as citizens and companies, to collaborative innovation activities. For this, they proposed a framework on innovation networks and network orchestration. In this direction, seven dimensions of the “orchestration of innovation networks” were assumed as a result of the combination of previous studies by Dhanaraj and Parke (2006), Hurmelinna-Laukkanen et al. (2011) and da Silva and Bitencourt (2019). In the sequence, different roles of orchestrators associated with the literature were adopted based on the work by Pikkarainen et al. (2017) and Nielsen and Gausdal (2017).

The authors’ results advance in relation to other fields by promoting the expansion of the “orchestration of innovation networks” model with the combination of distinct elements from the literature in a coherent whole (agenda setting, mobilization, network stabilization, creation and transfer of knowledge, innovation appropriability, coordination and co-creation) and in the validation of its applicability in the context of the innovation network studied. In addition, when relating different roles of orchestrators to the seven dimensions studied, it was realized that there is no linear and objective relationship between the dimensions and roles of the orchestrator, as in each dimension there may be more than one role being played in the orchestration.

Therefore, the findings suggest two theoretical contributions. First, the authors identified a role not discussed in the literature, here called the communicator. In the case analysis, the authors observed the communicator role through functions performed by a media partner of the innovation network and by a group of civil society engaged in the city's causes. Second, the authors indicated a new dimension of orchestration related to the management of communication in the innovation network and its externalities such as p. ex. civil and organized society, characteristic of an innovation network set up within a city.

Although several studies have proposed advances in the understanding of the orchestration of innovation networks (Dhanaraj & Parkhe, 2006; Ritala, Armila & Blomqvist, 2009; Nambisan & Sawhney, 2011; Hurmelinna-Laukkanen et al., 2011), the discussion on the topic is still a black box (Nilsen & Gausdal, 2017). More specifically, the authors identified a gap in the literature about the role and activities of actors in the city level. Few studies connected the regional dimension with the roles and activities of the orchestrators (Hurmelinna-Laukkanen et al., 2011; Pikkarainen et al., 2017), raising several challenges and opportunities to be considered by academics and managers.

This study aims to present a theoretical analysis on the capabilities (at the organizational) and skills (at the individual level) of the hub organization (orchestrator) in an innovation network.

The authors conducted literature reviews on the orchestration of innovation networks; and networking capabilities.

This study presents a theoretical model and a research agenda.

In interorganizational relations, a central actor can stand out the role of intentionally creating, extracting and distributing value in the network, generating gains for all members. Literature recognizes this set of intentional and deliberate actions as the “orchestration” of resources in the network. Despite the increasing interest regarding the theme, the phases and specific capabilities for orchestration still lack further investigation.

Few papers address innovation activities among tourism entities. The purpose of this paper is to elucidate the extent to which the theoretical framework of network orchestration can explain the system of relations underlying roles and behaviors of tourism actors in collaborative innovation settings.

Using interview data collected from destination management organizations and their destination partners within two polar-sampled North American destinations, this study identifies relationships which underlie the behaviors of tourism and hospitality actors engaged in collaborative innovative activities. To understand these relationships, this study abductively imposes the emergent theoretical framework of network orchestration and offers practical implications for conducting successful innovation among tourism collaborators.

First, orchestration of knowledge mobility processes in collaborative innovation settings is associated with trust, perceived fairness and the search for experts within the network. Second, orchestration of innovation appropriability processes is associated with forging shared ownership and knowledge exchange with “dissimilar” partners. Third, orchestration of network stability processes is associated with enhancing the reputation of influential actors within the tourism destination, and shared visioning of future innovation outcomes.

This paper contributes to the collaborative innovation landscape by testing the emerging theoretical framework of network orchestration and proposing practical implications for hospitality and tourism actors engaged in innovative activities. The research further demonstrates the value of abductive reasoning for elucidating theory from interview evidence and proposes a model for future studies on collaborative innovation networks.

Network orchestration has received widespread attention from scholars engaged in network-relationship governance research. This study aims to explore progress in network orchestration research and future prospects.

In this study, 105 articles related to network orchestration from the Web of Science Core Collection Database for the period 2006–2022 are collected as sample data, and bibliometric relationship maps of network orchestration research are visually presented using the CiteSpace software.

First, this study presents distributions of articles, methods, journals, authors, institutions and countries/regions in network orchestration research. Second, based on a reference co-citation analysis, three articles are identified as the key literature in network orchestration research. Based on a keyword co-occurrence analysis, the hotspots are found to include studies related to overall network and individual levels. A cluster analysis reveals six themes: innovation ecosystem, sustainable development, product development, sourcing, hub firm and innovation network. From a burst detection analysis, three frontiers emerge: organisation, collaboration and governance. Finally, some future research directions are proposed and important issues are raised.

This study is the first to reveal the progress of network orchestration research using quantitative bibliometric methods, and it provides insights to scholars and offers practitioners with a better understanding of network orchestration.

Small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), typically with limited resources, strive hard to obtain the trust of ecosystem participants as an orchestrator. Accordingly, the firms do not have sufficient legitimacy to persuade other parties to join their networks. This study aims to investigate how an SME operating in the publishing industry orchestrates ecosystem participants. In particular, the study analyzes how the orchestrating firm stimulates interactions among ecosystem participants.

Case study research with a qualitative approach has been documented as a well-accepted method for investigating complex phenomena and for theory building. Collected data from various informants and different collection techniques are triangulated to ensure validity. Cross-case analysis to identify common patterns is undertaken as the basis for developing a sound conclusion.

The study demonstrated what orchestrating firms should do to foster innovations and how they benefit from other participants in the ecosystem. The analysis identified the orchestrator's four roles: entrepreneurship networks, knowledge activation, innovation intermediary and network leadership. Among the four roles, there are interrelationships, and to some degree, these overlap. The orchestrating firm must emerge into the ecosystem and work together with all members of the ecosystem. Managers of the orchestrating firm and network members should collaborate to find the most beneficial configuration for all ecosystem participants.

This research is limited to the knowledge-intensive publishing industry. The use of specific industries closely related to innovation provides an advantage in the way that enables researchers to conduct depth analysis, but at the expense of generalizability, and therefore, future research can analyze different industries.

This study focuses on networks as the unit of analysis. Previous studies assumed individual firms as the unit of analysis and ignored the fact that companies interact with other companies when pursuing open innovation. The study focuses on the interactions between actors as the unit of analysis and on the role of orchestrators undertaken by an SME.

This paper aims to seek answers to the question: What are the relevant factors that allow not-for-profit innovation networks to successfully transition new technologies from proof-of-concept to commercialisation?

This question is examined using the knowledge-based view and network orchestration theory. Data are collected from 35 interviews with managers and engineers working within seven centres that comprise the High Value Manufacturing Catapult (HVMC). These centres constitute a not-for-profit innovation network where suppliers, customers and competitors collaborate to help transition new technologies across the “Valley of Death” (the gap between establishing a proof of concept and commercialisation).

Network orchestration theory suggests that a hub firm facilitates the exchange of knowledge amongst network members (knowledge mobility), to enable these members to profit from innovation (innovation appropriability). The hub firm ensures positive network growth, and also allows for the entry and exit of network members (network stability). This study of not-for-profit innovation networks suggests the role of a network orchestrator is to help ensure that intellectual property becomes a public resource that enhances the productivity of the domestic economy. The authors observed how network stability was achieved by the HVMC's seven centres employing a loosely-coupled hybrid network configuration. This configuration however ensured that new technology development teams, comprised of suppliers, customers and competitors, remained tightly-coupled to enable co-development of innovative technologies. Matching internal technical and sectoral expertise with complementary experience from network members allowed knowledge to flow across organisational boundaries and throughout the network. Matrix organisational structures and distributed decision-making authority created opportunities for knowledge integration to occur. Actively moving individuals and teams between centres also helped to diffuse knowledge to network members, while regular meetings between senior management ensured network coordination and removed resource redundancies.

The study contributes to knowledge-based theory by moving beyond existing understanding of knowledge integration in firms, and identified how knowledge is exchanged and aggregated within not-for-profit innovation networks. The findings contribute to network orchestration theory by challenging the notion that network orchestrators should enact and enforce appropriability regimes (patents, licences, copyrights) to allow members to profit from innovations. Instead, the authors find that not-for-profit innovation networks can overcome the frictions that appropriability regimes often create when exchanging knowledge during new technology development. This is achieved by pre-defining the terms of network membership/partnership and setting out clear pathways for innovation scaling, which embodies newly generated intellectual property as a public resource. The findings inform a framework that is useful for policy makers, academics and managers interested in using not-for-profit networks to transition new technologies across the Valley of Death.

Innovation ecosystems can emerge and grow organically, but the process can also be managed through conscious intervention. Therefore, this study observes different motivations and expectations for each group of actors. The lack of alignment between actors could have a negative influence on the development of innovation ecosystems. This study aims to analyze the coordination strategies of the actors throughout the life cycle of innovation ecosystems.

This study develops and proposes a model for coordinating innovation ecosystems based on the theoretical backgrounds of the ecosystem life cycle and ecosystem coordination.

This study argues that each stage of an innovation ecosystem’s life cycle – inception, launching, growth and maturity – demands different coordination strategies. Initially, networks are simpler and thus the coordination issues are less difficult. However, as the ecosystem evolves and the complexity of the networks increases, a more sophisticated strategy, such as orchestration or choreography, is needed.

This is a theoretical study that recommends further research to test this model.

The understanding of coordination and stages of the life cycle of an innovation ecosystem can guide actors in the design of strategies for developing of ecosystems.

The proposed framework could support strategies to engage civil society in actions to develop innovation ecosystems.

This study presents a framework to understand the coordination strategies better, considering the stages of an innovation ecosystem’s life cycle.

This study explores how open innovation (OI) can be instrumental for entrepreneurs in sensing and seizing entrepreneurial opportunities in small and medium enterprises (SMEs). This study also illustrates how OI can help SMEs overcome the liability of smallness.

This is exploratory research using an inductive, multiple-case study approach. This study capitalizes on five in-depth case studies of European SMEs to explore a phenomenon using replication logic and provide a robust basis for theory building.

This study presents a holistic view of the OI process in SMEs and illustrates the crucial role of entrepreneurs. The study provides a better understanding of how OI can help entrepreneurs sense and seize entrepreneurial opportunities by envisioning venture ideas and implementing business model innovation through the management of innovation partners.

The study emphasizes two critical roles of entrepreneurs in implementing OI in SMEs. First, the entrepreneur can be the instigator of strategic change, and second, he/she can orchestrate the innovation network. The findings emphasize that OI helps avoid knowledge corridors at the venture idea stage, leading to a (re)structuring of the business model and the emergence of a network of innovation partners, which should be managed hands-on. This study discusses in detail the two crucial roles of entrepreneurs.

The objective of this research is to identify and characterize the coordination systems used by SME hub firms that are in a situation of dependence with respect to other members of their network, taking into account the influence of hub firm size.

Seven case studies were carried out: six innovation networks in which SMEs play a central role are compared with a “reference” case, in which the hub firm is a large company.

The authors' qualitative empirical analysis of seven innovation projects showed that: the sharing of benefits and the guarantees that are implemented vary depending on the hub firm's degree of dependence; trust and recourse to formal agreements differ according to hub firm size; and conflict solving is influenced by both hub firm size and degree of dependence.

Results have important implications for the management of innovation networks which are increasingly important for the development of SMEs. The knowledge of the adequate coordination mechanism is central for a SME hub firm and the success of the innovation project.

Investigations into the internal operation of inter‐organizational networks have become increasingly common. Nevertheless, empirical studies are still rare, particularly in the field of innovation networks and even more in the case of networks set up by small firms. This article partially fills this gap.

The purpose of this paper is to identify the main criteria for selecting actors to compose these business platforms and addressing the co-creation of value and improve the performance of startups.

The methodology is based on the search for key factors for the selection of actors and the understanding of co-creation of value and the concept of startups. The content of this paper is substantiated on an extensive review of the literature related to the subjects’ value-cocreation and new startups, and the review is based on the articles found in the databases of Ebsco, Emerald, Science Direct, Scopus, Village and Web of Science.

This paper identifies the main key-factors found in the literature for selecting actors to co-create value in startups and organizes the findings in five categories: value creation, interaction, actor behavior, client and partnership. It also presents the possibility of future research that will be able to put the study in practice.

The results of this research have not been tested empirically, which opens the door for future studies that can prove the effectiveness of the findings. It is also important to mention that there are few articles in the literature that directly address this topic, and some definitions of actor/co-creation of value/business model may also change.

The selection criteria of the actors listed are useful for service entrepreneurs and managers to assist in decision-making at the stage of choosing their partners for value co-creation in startups. Furthermore, it involves mitigating waste in startups and maximizing the economic gains of partners through value co-creation in startups.

This study is one of the first attempts to recognize the key factors for selecting actors to co-create value in startups, aiming at their success in the market.